Re: [RFA 2/3] gdbarch-ification of ravenscar-thread support.

[Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>]

> > The question: Right now, I put ravenscar-thread.o in the list of
> > objects to always be built, regardless of whether or not GDB is
> > configured with a target that can take advantage of it.  I seems
> > slightly wasteful, but somehow consistent with have solib-target
> > always available, for instance.
> 
> It's a little bit different, because solib-target is driven entirely
> from data the target pushes to GDB.  Any random embedded target can
> enable that with no changes to GDB.  Ravenscar support always
> needs code changes in GDB, OTOH.

Agreed. I made the changes, and ravenscar-thread.o is only pulled in
when another arch-specific ravenscar-thread unit is included.

> BTW, ARCH-ravenscar-thread.c would be a naming scheme more in line
> with other files.  Can we change that before adding more ports?

No problem. I agree as well.

I did it by adding a few extra patches on top of this one. That way,
it allows me to provide patches that show the intent of the changes
along them way... This is now a 6-patches series!

Thanks for the feedback,
-- 
Joel